Define Love

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Mind Over Matter, Apr 10, 2011.

  1. Mind Over Matter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,205
    The Catechism of the Catholic Church’s glossary entry for love says, "See Charity". Charity is defined as, "The theological virtue by which we love God above all things for his own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God".

    Paul tells us that love is the greatest of the theological virtues: "So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love” (1 Cor 13:13).

    The Catholic Encyclopedia article Love (Theological Virtue) expands on this:

    (1) Its origin, by Divine infusion. "The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost" (Rom., v, 5). It is, therefore, distinct from, and superior to, the inborn inclination or the acquired habit of loving God in the natural order. Theologians agree in saying that it is infused together with sanctifying grace, to which it is closely related either by way of real identity, as some few hold, or, according to the more common view, by way of connatural emanation.

    (2) Its seat, in the human will. Although charity is at times intensely emotional, and frequently reacts on our sensory faculties, still it properly resides in the rational will a fact not to be forgotten by those who would make it an impossible virtue.

    (3) Its specific act, i.e. the love of benevolence and friendship. To love God is to wish Him all honor and glory and every good, and to endeavor, as far as we can, to obtain it-for Him. St. John (xiv, 23; xv, 14) emphasizes the feature of reciprocity which makes charity a veritable friendship of man with God.

    (4) Its motive, i.e., the Divine goodness or amiability taken absolutely and as made known to us by faith. It matters not whether that goodness be viewed in one, or several, or all of the Divine attributes, but, in all cases, it must be adhered to, not as a source of help, or reward, or happiness for ourselves, but as a good in itself infinitely worthy of our love, in this sense alone is God loved for His own sake. However, the distinction of the two loves: concupiscence, which prompts hope; and benevolence, which animates charity, should not be forced into a sort of mutual exclusion, as the Church has repeatedly condemned any attempts at discrediting the workings of Christian hope.

    (5) Its range, i.e., both God and man. While God alone is all lovable, yet, inasmuch as all men, by grace and glory, either actually share or at least are capable of sharing in the Divine goodness, it follows that supernatural love rather includes than excludes them, according to Matt., xxii, 39, and Luke, x, 27. Hence one and the same virtue of charity terminates in both God and man, God primarily and man secondarily.

    Some of my questions -

    For atheists:
    What does "love" mean for an atheist?
    How do atheists value love?

    For Christians:
    Christ tells us that the two greatest commandments are based on Love and that everything else stems from it.


    Mt 22:36-40 36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" 37 And He said to him, " `YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, `YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' 40 "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."


    So - My question is, can we, as Catholics and as Christians, trace every rule back to this "rule of Love"?

    Can you think of any rule that is not traceable to the "Law of Love"?

    It will be interesting to see what members have to say on this.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2011
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. YoYoPapaya Trump/Norris - 2012 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,039
    First of all we don't love imaginary things. The love we don't use unnecessarily on invisible men (is that gay?), we instead use to love our spouse. That's maybe why atheists are usually more sexually exclusive with their partners than religious people.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    love (n.): a strong positive emotion of regard and affection.

    It has a few other meanings, too, but this one is the main one.

    Why do you think that theists and atheists would value love differently? Everybody values strong positive emotions, don't they?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. YoYoPapaya Trump/Norris - 2012 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,039
    I guess it's when you put someone else above you like a spouse, a child or a dear dear friend. No reason to look in spellbooks to find an answer.
     
  8. Mind Over Matter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,205
    Love, as we speak of it is not an emotion although it can generate emotional responses. Emotions change with the wind and avail us nothing. If you wish to place love as an emotion, then how can anyone "love" their spouse for a lifetime. One moment you will "feel" love, another moment you might "feel" anger, even hate, and most of the time you will likely "feel" apathy.
    Love, real lasting love, is a decision. It is to desire the greatest good for the object of our Love. It is love that lasts through all the emotional ups and downs of life. It is the clinging to each other in faith. This then is Love.

    For Christians or anyone interested:
    St Paul teaches us about Love:
    Christ taught us about Love too. By his selfless healing of others; by his teachings of gentleness and acceptance and giving; by his death on the cross. He tells us that, no greater Love has a man than he lay down his life for his fellow.

    This then is "Agape" Love. Love that gives and does not take. Love that desires the highest good for another even though it require sacrifice from me.
    It is not "Eros" love that one might associate with aphrodite. Love that is emotive and fickle.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2011
  9. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    Love stinks!
     
  10. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    then your using the wrong hole...
     
  11. YoYoPapaya Trump/Norris - 2012 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,039
  12. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    I call myself an agnostic, but that's close enough to atheist for Sciforums work.

    'Love' isn't an easy word to define. I guess that it's affection or attachment for things or for people. There's definitely an emotional component to it, and many people would probably identify love with that felt emotion. Another common usage for the word 'love' makes it refer more specifically to sexual desire and attachment, but I prefer the broader usage.

    I guess that I might distinguish liking something because of the pleasure it brings me, from truly loving something because of its own qualities. I like beer, because it makes me drunk and I like being drunk. (Or did, when I drank lots of beer.) But I love certain people because of their qualities as people. Beer in itself is basically nothing and I like it because of what it does to me. But the people that I love are far more important and I love them because of them.

    That's probably about as far as my own philosophical thinking about love goes. Beyond that point, it's more a matter for psychology, I guess. I haven't really devoted a lot of thought to it.

    Plato was a non-Christian who gave the subject of love a lot of thought. He derived his theory of love from how he understood aesthetics and from the attachment to beauty. Then he proceeded to distinguish different grades of love by their different kinds of object, placing love that transcends the physical higher than love of physical things. Christian theology has been strongly influenced by that.

    But Plato's ultimate forms of love diverge from those of the Christians. Just as love of ideal things is greater than love of physical things, for Plato ideal love is greater even than personal love. So our love still needs to ascend above loving a person, even if that's been re-imagined as loving a divine person. For Plato, the ultimate form of love is 'Philosophy', a Greek word that literally means "Love of Wisdom". And I believe that elsewhere in his writings he gives it more of an ethical spin, favoring love of the Good. I'm not really sure that Plato would distinguish Wisdom from the Good.
     
  13. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,355
    "Love is the condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein.

    I've also been dubious of the requirements of the Christian God (e.g. as detailed by MoM above): if you love God with all your heart, soul and mind... it doesn't leave much for the wife and kids!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    How not?

    If you really love God, then you will be very grateful that He gave you wife and children, and this will in turn manifest in how lovingly you treat your wife and children. They will be much better off, the more you love God.
     
  15. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    I can't explain what love is with words, it wouldn't do it justice or would end up being tedious and again remove the beauty of what love is.


    Peace
     
  16. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,355
    But then the wife and children are meaningless in and of their own right, and are merely loved for being gifts from God, not for who they are.
    And if you say you can't love your partner and children then are you really talking about love at all?
     
  17. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    How can they be who they are without god?, unless you are an atheist and just deny god's existence, but then that's totaly not following the believers definition of love or even understanding his train of thought.


    Peace.
     
  18. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    What Chi says.
     
  19. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    you are a theist.
     
  20. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    that's not what he means. you are putting god first and loving them because of god, not because of them.
     
  21. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    Love is placing your mental integrity and emotional well-being into the hands of another to do as they will.
     
  22. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    that's surrender, not love. you should never put yourself into the control of another unless they care for you or you could get hurt. actually you should never surrender yourself anyways. that's too co-dependent.

    in some cases, it is not possible to stop. for instance, children.
     
  23. Rav Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Signal is more like an agnostic theist. I personally hope he finds a religion soon so the philosophy forums feel a little less like his personal search for one

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page